I’m going to say something that shouldn’t be controversial but will be. If you are a Christian, you can support border control and immigration being legal vs illegal. You CANNOT celebrate deportations and get off on the cruelty, and be a real Christ follower. Period
Of course advance information on US combat operations is classified. Pretending otherwise is an insult to our troops, who all know this.
The Secretary is unfit to lead.
So are we still more upset about Diverse, but qualified, yet presumed unqualified hires, than DUI hires?
(Asking for anyone who cares about US National Security)
Pete Hegseth needs to go for the safety of the United States & the allies that we still have.
You always own your intellectual property, mailing list, and subscriber payments. With full editorial control and no gatekeepers, you can do the work you most believe in.
Join the most interesting and insightful discussions.
That's a big No, capital "N." There's no possible transparency here. What are the possible, realistic returns for a $100 investment? We are already the working capital of the Substack owners. The idea of Substack was to start slow, build free subscribers, introduce pay options: Substack gets a percentage of every paying subscriber we have. You're also paying well-known names an advance against future earnings: That's negative cost-flow for you until they earn back the advance, like the well-kno…
In all the time that you've been writing on Substack, hasn't it made you trust them, re. that transparency? At least as far as $100?
People change! It might be for good now but there’s 99% probability that it would turn against the investors somehow…More money causes greed! Medium was paying their writers crazy amount of money until boom, everything changed; someone even called it madium… let’s just enjoy substack while it lasts. And please feel free to stop by my page. Thank you!
But isn't taking that attitude condemning Substack for something they haven't yet done and is currently showing no signs of doing? Which is, you know, a terrible way of supporting something? Or rather, it's the opposite of doing it?
I’m not condemning them, I’m just saying people should read the article again. They talked about risk, if you’re not ready for the risk do not opt in. The first 2 lines of the article were so catchy, we can’t say they are not smart. They’ve been good at least been doing good for the past years but they are not totally honest and I totally understand, no company is. It’s hard for an online company even a physical one to stay on the righteous track they’ve followed for a long time, take a look at…
Well, I'd rather base a judgment on Substack based on what they have been doing - which, as you say, has been mostly really good stuff. No public company is entirely transparent for all sorts of reasons, and everyone makes mistakes, and it's good to listen to critics and weigh up what they're saying. And yes, any investment is a risk. Who knows what will happen when it comes to business projections?
But a little show of faith based on a ton of goodwill generated from a lot of work helping writer…
Well, they’ve really now stated a valid reason why the investments, what they planned to do with money, they’ve only emphasized more on their worth, that we’re going to own a piece of the company and how to feel safe about investment with your country or state’s agreement whatever guiding you! Maybe after they let us know their plans are, I’ll reconsider but until then I continue to stick to my thoughts on this🙂
Do you think there is a bias showing in the response pattern that promotes without reasonable questioning for clarification of what changes might be in store, or transparency as to what they will do for you and Mii?
